The issue of abortions for minor abnormalities and other special cases has continuously elicited debated over its legalization and how it can compromise the societal morals and ethics. The main proponents of these debates are religious institutions who back their arguments basing on rights and other factors. However, despite this uproar from some of the organizations and religious institutions, some countries have adopted laws that legalize abortions in some special cases. The common one is when the life of the mother is in danger.
The paper seeks to discuss argumentatively the phenomenon basing the ideas from Lewis Vaughan’s question in his article ‘Abortion for Minor Abnormalities.’
The question of whether abortions for abnormalities still conform to the morals in our society has seen many discussions. First, any medical practitioner ought to abide by the set regulations and the ethical codes set in their field of profession. This means that they will be held accountable for any decision made.
Therefore, this makes them cautious in their activities and ensures they conform to the set rules. However, with the ever-changing dynamics in the societal world, people have continuously disregarded classical ethical thoughts on the subject. Therefore, the issue of moral obligatory on abortion has been changing with time. People are now embracing the need to perform abortions when there are risks. However, it has also faced some confrontation from some religious institutions and some organization. This is also accompanied by the spread of misinformation on the phenomenon. From my point of view, abortions for defined special it is not compromising to the existing morals.
If practitioners recommend abortion and the patients, agree with the recommendation, this does not in any way compromise morals in the society today.
This tricks down to the dilemma of whether it is permissible to perform an abortion on a defective fetus. On an impartial point, it is permissible with regards to the ethical codes if the fetus is maybe dead. This is done mainly to save the life of the mother. However, if it has some abnormalities but alive and does not pose any challenge to the mother nor its growth, and a practitioner did the abortion that will be against the set ethical codes. This is because some abnormalities can be rectified using medical technologies thus by doing so it will be against human dignity. However, for a defective fetus that will probably die within some few days, the medical practitioners will highly recommend an abortion. This is because it might pose a health challenge to the mother in the future. With an agreement with the patient, this does not conflict the existing moral laws in the society. It is medically also advisable since if the practice is not carried out, we might end up losing both the mother and the fetus. Thus, it is better if one was life was saved.
Another dilemma that surrounds this phenomenon when the fetus will live with problems and also it will continue causing problems in the family in its lifetime. On this, the decision of the mother or the patient takes center stage (Warren, 1984). One, no one is very sure of the future, but we can probably predict what will happen. Medical practitioners may advise the patient with a different perspective that will not be pleasing to the patients. The patients may also opt to take their doctors advice or not. The question of moral and ethical adherence in such a situation is at stake. This leaves the patient at the liberty to make a decision. With the existing ethical codes, there lacks a clear directive with a concrete constitute on how to deal with the situation perfectly.
Abnormalities There has been uproar over reported cases of abortion in on the fetus with a cleft lip. However, as far as some countries such as Britain permit abortions on some minor cases, this cannot be justified in all situations where one regards it as minor (Lawrence, 2007). The existing laws have not established appropriate regulation with regards to permissible situations. There is a gap because it does not define precisely the exceptional cases. However, some cases can be treated through surgery such as cleft lip. This, therefore, regards an abortion due to the cleft lip on the fetus against ethical codes. This also applies to any condition that can be treated after birth.
Some studies in India have shown that sex selection is high in India and has led to an increasing loss of girls through abortions. This also explains the imbalance in population and the male constitute the larger part of the population. This practice cannot be justified though it faces a lot of challenges with the advancement of technology. Ultrasound machines are now potable thus making them hard to monitor. However, this practice does not conform to the existing ethical codes in the country nor globally. Most who engage in sex-selection abortions also fail to give a justifiable reason on their choice.
Female feticide, especially in India, is attributed to the low population of female that men. In India, it is the act of aborting a female fetus without adhering to the existing laws. Don Marquis (1989) argues that the practice is immoral and unethical since it terminates the future of a person. There exist no substantial constitute that can justify female feticide without conflicting with existing ethics and morals (Amin, 2014). With this regards, the practice should be heavily fought with intensified campaigns to sensitize people on its problems and also enforcing existing laws.
An abortion aimed at eliminating fetus that has Down syndrome symptoms has continuously received a fight from the society. Down syndrome does not curtail one from realizing personal goals in life. There are also ways that can be used to treat the condition through diagnosis. Most parents opt to abort due to their anxieties. However, this is against human dignity. Moreover, the continuing campaign efforts to sensitize parents on the phenomenon should be embarked heavily. Despite one possessing the s, syndromes one’s future remains lighted. Therefore, worries on the babies’ future should not be a justifying reason to carry out an abortion.